Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work. - Linux

This is a discussion on Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work. - Linux ; http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...k-with-ubuntu/
As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just works"
really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that really do
...

Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just works"
really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that really do
just work.

And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works". It did
not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it.... It's
taken me 3 months to get it to work

Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going to
"work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and not have
all of the features that people who use Windows get.

Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the problem was
Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let Linux have the
features they provide to Windows.

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

[deletia]
> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going to
> "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and not have
> all of the features that people who use Windows get.

Mebbe.

Mebbe not.

Nothing you've linked to demonstrates that really.
>
>
> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the problem was
> Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let Linux have the
> features they provide to Windows.
>

You mean the app level features that look like they have nothing to do
with the driver? That bit kind of reminded me of the Amiga in a way.

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:01:25 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
> http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...k-with-ubuntu/
>
>
> As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
> mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just works"
> really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that really do
> just work.
>
>
>
>
> And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
>
> got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works". It did
> not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it.... It's
> taken me 3 months to get it to work
>
>
>
> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going to
> "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and not have
> all of the features that people who use Windows get.
>
>
> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the problem was
> Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let Linux have the
> features they provide to Windows.
>

If you want to really have a nightmare try using Logitech Webcams with
Linux.
If you go into the support forums asking for help they tell you right up
front it doesn't work.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:28:19 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:01:25 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>
>> http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...ams-that-just-
work-with-ubuntu/
>>
>>
>> As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
>> mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just
>> works" really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that
>> really do just work.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
>> got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works".
>> It did
>> not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it....
>> It's taken me 3 months to get it to work
>>
>>
>>
>> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going
>> to "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and
>> not have all of the features that people who use Windows get.
>>
>>
>> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
>> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the
>> problem was Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let
>> Linux have the features they provide to Windows.
>>
>
> If you want to really have a nightmare try using Logitech Webcams with
> Linux.
> If you go into the support forums asking for help they tell you right up
> front it doesn't work.

Except for the Logitech cam I am looking at right now ....

--
Rick

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

On 2008-07-01, Rick wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:28:19 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:01:25 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...ams-that-just-
> work-with-ubuntu/
>>>
>>>
>>> As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
>>> mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just
>>> works" really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that
>>> really do just work.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
>>> got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works".
>>> It did
>>> not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it....
>>> It's taken me 3 months to get it to work
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going
>>> to "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and
>>> not have all of the features that people who use Windows get.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
>>> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the
>>> problem was Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let
>>> Linux have the features they provide to Windows.
>>>
>>
>> If you want to really have a nightmare try using Logitech Webcams with
>> Linux.
>> If you go into the support forums asking for help they tell you right up
>> front it doesn't work.
>
> Except for the Logitech cam I am looking at right now ....

I dunno. This stuff tends to blow up in their faces.

If they didn't dredge up stupid stuff like this I would never
have known that the 9000 can do HD and 1600x1200 apparently.

--
How did irc manage to get so pretentious about civility |||
of discourse when it doesn't even allow for the free and / | \
open exchange of ideas?

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

"JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
news:slrng6l8mr.llm.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2008-07-01, Rick wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:28:19 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:01:25 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...ams-that-just-
>> work-with-ubuntu/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
>>>> mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just
>>>> works" really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that
>>>> really do just work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
>>>> got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works".
>>>> It did
>>>> not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it....
>>>> It's taken me 3 months to get it to work
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going
>>>> to "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and
>>>> not have all of the features that people who use Windows get.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
>>>> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the
>>>> problem was Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let
>>>> Linux have the features they provide to Windows.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you want to really have a nightmare try using Logitech Webcams with
>>> Linux.
>>> If you go into the support forums asking for help they tell you right up
>>> front it doesn't work.
>>
>> Except for the Logitech cam I am looking at right now ....
>
> I dunno. This stuff tends to blow up in their faces.

Webcam support in linux must be great. That's why Schestowitz posted how the
next kernel was going to have support for 100+ webcams.

But according to you everything already works now. So the kernel guys are
idiots for adding support because clearly it's not needed... right?

> If they didn't dredge up stupid stuff like this I would never
> have known that the 9000 can do HD and 1600x1200 apparently.
>
> --
> How did irc manage to get so pretentious about civility |||
> of discourse when it doesn't even allow for the free and / | \
> open exchange of ideas?
>
> Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.usenet.com

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

On 2008-07-01, Ezekiel wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
> news:slrng6l8mr.llm.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2008-07-01, Rick wrote:
>>> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:28:19 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:01:25 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...ams-that-just-
>>> work-with-ubuntu/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
>>>>> mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just
>>>>> works" really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that
>>>>> really do just work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
>>>>> got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works".
>>>>> It did
>>>>> not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it....
>>>>> It's taken me 3 months to get it to work
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going
>>>>> to "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and
>>>>> not have all of the features that people who use Windows get.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
>>>>> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the
>>>>> problem was Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let
>>>>> Linux have the features they provide to Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you want to really have a nightmare try using Logitech Webcams with
>>>> Linux.
>>>> If you go into the support forums asking for help they tell you right up
>>>> front it doesn't work.
>>>
>>> Except for the Logitech cam I am looking at right now ....
>>
>> I dunno. This stuff tends to blow up in their faces.
>
> Webcam support in linux must be great. That's why Schestowitz posted how the
> next kernel was going to have support for 100+ webcams.
>
> But according to you everything already works now. So the kernel guys are
> idiots for adding support because clearly it's not needed... right?

...except we weren't talking about n+1 other cameras.
>
>
>
>
>> If they didn't dredge up stupid stuff like this I would never
>> have known that the 9000 can do HD and 1600x1200 apparently.

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 17:44:12 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
> news:slrng6l8mr.llm.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2008-07-01, Rick wrote:
>>> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:28:19 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:01:25 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalin...ams-that-just-
>>> work-with-ubuntu/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've said before, I think the hardware lists on the Ubuntu wiki are
>>>>> mostly useless for real users because nobody is insisting that "just
>>>>> works" really means "just works", and nobody is flagging the ones that
>>>>> really do just work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And if you finally can get it to work with linux....
>>>>> got a Pro 9000 around Christmas because I read that it "Just Works".
>>>>> It did
>>>>> not work in Ubuntu 7.04. I chased and chased and could not solve it....
>>>>> It's taken me 3 months to get it to work
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then like scanners, printers and lots of other peripherals - it's going
>>>>> to "work" by using some lowest common denominator "generic" driver and
>>>>> not have all of the features that people who use Windows get.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wanna get jealous look at all the features in Windows when installed
>>>>> properly. I installed it on an old PC with Windows to verify the
>>>>> problem was Linux and not the camera. I hope someday Logitech will let
>>>>> Linux have the features they provide to Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you want to really have a nightmare try using Logitech Webcams with
>>>> Linux.
>>>> If you go into the support forums asking for help they tell you right up
>>>> front it doesn't work.
>>>
>>> Except for the Logitech cam I am looking at right now ....
>>
>> I dunno. This stuff tends to blow up in their faces.
>
> Webcam support in linux must be great. That's why Schestowitz posted how the
> next kernel was going to have support for 100+ webcams.
>
> But according to you everything already works now. So the kernel guys are
> idiots for adding support because clearly it's not needed... right?
>
>
>
>
>> If they didn't dredge up stupid stuff like this I would never
>> have known that the 9000 can do HD and 1600x1200 apparently.
>>
>> --
>> How did irc manage to get so pretentious about civility |||
>> of discourse when it doesn't even allow for the free and / | \
>> open exchange of ideas?
>>
>> Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> http://www.usenet.com
>
>
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Notice all the qualifications...Stuff like "2006 version only" etc....

Here's an even better example of what a person has to go through to get one
to work. It looks like *soooooooo* much fun:

http://ubuntulinuxhelp.com/linux-dri...ickcam-fusion/
just inherited a Logitech Quickcam Fusion, but where the heck are the
drivers? I took a look at the Logitech site¡K and asked the same question.
(Sidenote: Logitech, you need to get your act together. Where are your
Linux drivers?).

Needless to say Ekiga could not use the cam. After much hair pulling,
nashing of teeth and grumbling, I was able to Google enough information to
put a solution together. If someone is looking for a solution on Feisty,
read on¡K

First, I needed to install the linux headers for my kernel (so I could
properly compile the drivers). To compile, I needed to tools (GCC, etc.):
(Unplug the cam!!)

sudo apt-get install build-essential

sudo apt-get install linux-headers-386

* If you use i686 the make sure your command is: sudo apt-get install
linux-headers-686 instead

** I don¡¦t know what the rules are about distribution, but if they
disappear or someone cannot get them, just say so in the comments section
and I will have them.
Now that I had the drivers, run the following command in the same directory
you saved them to:

sudo make && sudo make install

This installs those drivers and you can type ¡§dmesg¡¨ in the same terminal
(after plugging in the cam) to see the ¡§xxxx class device¡¨ message. That
means the drivers work.

I started Ekiga, but no-go¡K no video¡K

So:

sudo modprobe uvcvideo

Seems the problem was with Ekiga preferences? I tried Tried v4l2 on the
video devices, and the set the ¡¥USB video class device¡¦ to auto
(I¡¦m going from memory in this last part as I didn¡¦t write it down¡K but I¡¦m
sure I saw that in a post in one of the links below). Either way¡K Wheeee!!!
It works!

Only in Ekiga.

I don¡¦t remember every single page I looked at, but most of them are here.
There is no way I could have figured all this out myself, so big kudos to
all the contributors on those sites!:

I see it like this. Linux is not for everybody.
There are still software programs that need updating in features.
I think if people go together to make less Distro's and add more
features,
a lot more would be accomplished.

Linux is a LEARNING CURVE to anybody not a geek. Some users are ok
with that.
Many are not. Most of those I put linux on do not want to be bothered
with the
tweeking. I am always shocked that linux people still think a command
line is fine.
The users want easy to use, the geeks say, "it works on my machine
after typing this"

Who wants to remember this or that? Can't we have a button to do it?
geeze......

i am still hoping the factions come together a bit more....

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

I am always shocked that Windwoes people think a virus-scanner is
fine.

A little typing upon intial computer setup (for those who are
installing their OS themselves) ain't going to break anyone's widdle
fingies.

That "keyboard" thingie is really not so scary. You used it to type
your post, in fact. Sheesh.

Re: Linux - "just works" doesn't work and it's generic support if it does work.

On 2008-07-02, Psyc Geek wrote:
> My Logitech works on Ubuntu 8.
> It is not near as nice as on windows, but it works.
>
> Here is a list of what works on Linux.
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SkypeWebCams
>
> I see it like this. Linux is not for everybody.
> There are still software programs that need updating in features.
> I think if people go together to make less Distro's and add more
> features,
> a lot more would be accomplished.
>
> Linux is a LEARNING CURVE to anybody not a geek. Some users are ok

Anything different has a LEARNING CURVE.

The computer geek is simply not frightened off by the prospec.
> with that.
> Many are not. Most of those I put linux on do not want to be bothered
> with the
> tweeking. I am always shocked that linux people still think a command
> line is fine.

Depending on what you want to do the commandline is not only "fine" but
it is actually quite preferable. However, this is not what this little
red herring is about. You're trying to trot out the obsolete idea that
Linux is going to necessarily subject the end user to more of the command
line than Windows would... or the idea that Windows would never subject
you to the commandline.

DHCP release/renew anyone?

> The users want easy to use, the geeks say, "it works on my machine
> after typing this"

Nope.

It "just works" on my machine.
>
> Who wants to remember this or that? Can't we have a button to do it?
> geeze......
>

We do.

You're FUD is at least 5 years out of date if not 10.
> i am still hoping the factions come together a bit more....
>

--

It is not true that Microsoft doesn't innovate.

They brought us the email virus.

In my Atari days, such a notion would have |||
been considered a complete absurdity. / | \

(translated: find every file that has not been modified in
more than 7 days from the filesystems mounted at /, /usr,
and /home; pipe the resulting list into cpio, compatibility
mode, and generate an archive that is then compressed using bzip).

However, in order to figure this out one might have to do
'man find', 'man cpio', and 'man bzip2', and/or a Google search.

A GUI is much easier to use, but it may not have the capabilities.
>
> I am always shocked that Windwoes people think a virus-scanner is
> fine.

It's a tradeoff; safety versus cost versus safeguarding. Linux
has excellent safeguarding for many reasons, chief of which is
that it uses a Unix design, which took its lumps in the 70's
and 80's, and avoided some of the more common pitfalls Windows
is now trying to deal with.

Windows came up through the 1-user-per-puter realm, and
therefore didn't have a proper foundation. NT gave it
a little more stability. Vista might give it a little
more yet, though UAC feels more like a bandaid than a
structural beam.
>
> A little typing upon intial computer setup (for those who are
> installing their OS themselves) ain't going to break anyone's widdle
> fingies.

Preinstalls are better than slapping in a disc and waiting 20 minutes,
easy as Linux installation instructions otherwise are.

The flip side: the preinstall is in danger of becoming
a monopoly -- or in the case of Windows already has
become one.
>
> That "keyboard" thingie is really not so scary. You used it to type
> your post, in fact. Sheesh.
>

Now now, not everyone can understand what those 104 (105 on
international) buttons are supposed to do. ;-)